JimGant

No slam, dunk here for everyone to adopt -- but here is how a US Roth distribution is dealt with, if recipient lives in the UK: The OECD is rewriting their model tax treaty, to encompass language, like the above. And, Thailand is trying hard to become recognized, by petitioning to join the OECD. Thus, I'd certainly take advantage of the prevailing winds, and certainly omit any mention to Thai tax authorities of my Roth distribution -- or similar. And since there's no mention of Roth in my Thai tax return -- or no tax return -- what's the chance TRD calls me in to chat about this? And if they did, I certainly could present an excellent case for why I didn't declare it. Anyway, for grey areas, give yourself the advantage, particularly if you have supporting info for your stance. Certainly, don't give the other side the advantage for a grey area....

The taxation of remittances goes away if worldwide taxation is implemented.

DTA gives Thailand primary taxation rights on your 401k. So, it's not exempt. US has to absorb a tax credit, meaning, you need to know what your Thai tax would be on this 401k before you file your US tax return, so you can deduct the credit (figure the Thai tax out on the back of an envelope, if you haven't already filed; US does not require any proof of this credit).

401k, IRAs, like private pensions, are taxable primarily by Thailand. The US has secondary taxation rights, due to the saving clause in all DTAs, that allow the US taxation rights regardless of what the treaty says. Thus, Thailand gets to tax your 401k/IRA/private pension as the primary taxation authority. As such, they get to keep all the taxes collected -- and the US has to absorb a tax credit for these Thai taxes paid. Result: US may not get to keep any taxes, if Thai taxes are greater than those of the US. Or, if Thai taxes are less than US -- Thailand still gets to keep all taxes collected; and the US collects whatever is left after absorbing the credit. You, the US taxpayer, still end up paying the same overall tax bill, when you add the two countries' tax bills. The below quote from the US-Thai Technical Explanation of the treaty:

Wrong. It's total ASSESSABLE income. If your DTA says your home country pension is not assessable by Thailand, it will, then, just be a missing number on your Thai tax return. If all or most of your worldwide income is not assessable by Thailand per DTA, then you don't even need to file a tax return.

Would that be money remitted from a BG's foreign account? Even here, there's a chance it's not income -- if not declared as such, how is TRD going to know, unless they interview everyone that receives money from abroad (which would be absurd, as not cost effective) If BG gets the money from someone else's foreign account, here it's certainly not prima facie income declarable by her -- unless it's a payment for a current service being rendered, like cutting sender's grass while sender is in the States. Anyway, the recipient of wired money from someone's foreign account, if for some reason called into TRD for a chat, could just say the money was a gift (which would put her in the 10k gift tax situation); or that she's just holding the money for the sender, until he returns to Thailand, 'cause he doesn't have a bank account; etc. Again, she's not in an income situation, unless performing current services. It's the remitter, if a tax resident of Thailand, who's on the hook for any taxes on remitted monies. But, yes -- a BG who received remittances that exceeded an amount the TRD has established as being subject to random compliance audits -- would just be another individual subject to such an audit. In which case, she could just prove she didn't send the money to herself, thus not subject to any tax (except maybe gift tax).

Plus, must be married for those five years to the spouse from whom you're deriving the spousal benefit.

Yep. Completely under the radar. Without the equivalent of 1099s or W-2s, like in the US -- TRD has no computer tracking of taxable income -- and they're certainly aware much remitted monies are non assessable per DTA, or by the decree for pre-2024 income. So, what's TRD going to do -- call in for a chat 300,000 farangs without TINs? And what if they did? I would imagine most could prove that their remittances are non assessable income -- or for sure, all assessable income is less than meets the taxable threshold. Thus, another reason TRD wouldn't waste resources on non-productive chats. No, forget getting a TIN, or for filing a tax return if no taxes are owed. There are no TRD bad days in your future.

Ridiculous. Only if you remit a significant amount -- like many millions during the year -- would you possibly make a list of potential folks subject to a random compliance audit. Otherwise, TRD doesn't have the resources, nor any reason, to track the average remitter.

Well, if a dual citizen, the US citizenship overrides, at least for SS, tho' not for govt pensions:

It's only too much baht -- if you know that the baht is heading on a permanent downward spiral -- which reason tells me, you cannot know. And the last decade or so have shown the baht just muddles between 30 and 35 baht per US dollar. So, I wouldn't have the foggiest to know whether or not to bring money over here into a Thai baht bank account, or a USD account, based on FX speculation. Thus, it would just be which type account is easier to put baht notes into my hand or to pay my Thai creditor per direct debit.

Well, sure -- that's how most of us do it. SWIFT dollars sent will be converted to baht , at your bank, using their TT rate. WISE uses a more favorable FX rate than TT, but has more fees. Anyway, your method vs those I mentioned, will probably have timing as the determining factor as to what's best. All on the same day -- haven't a clue, but your method certainly adds a new twist to sending money to Thailand.

Huh? The wife, a US-Thai, and me have all our US bank accounts and other bank assets as joint, with right of survivorship. My IRA and life insurance policies all have her as sole beneficiary. Our real estate, also jointly owned, has now all been sold -- but, if not, also wouldn't have been an inheritance problem. So, not sure what you're talking about.... Our biggest problem is trying to equally divide our US financial assets between nieces and nephews in the US, and in Thailand. The US ones are POD (pay on death), thus will receive our financial assets without the need of a Will. However, unable to do a POD for Thai relatives, as no SS or ITIN possible. So, now bringing some of those financial assets over to Thailand, where our Thai Wills will suffice to provide for them.

Yes, at any point in time. But, a week, month, year after you establish that dollar account, those dollars may be worth less than what's available in your US bank for conversion to baht. You can't pretend having a USD account somehow mitigates against an FX loss, unless you've somehow placed yourself in an emergency-need-baht situation. Again, as I said, having a contingency account in baht is certainly not inferior to having one in USD. Or, maybe I'm missing your point. Are you saying you send dollars to your USD account, then, using that as a conduit, make an immediate conversion to baht, thus appreciating the superior conversion rate doing this in-country conversion realizes?

You mean, it's a surplus fund, sitting there for a contingency, that would require baht? Why not, then, keep a surplus fund in baht, that can be assessed immediately, not almost immediately. There's no interest advantage. Makes no cents, er, sense. As far as FX speculation, yeah, maybe a couple of days journey across the ocean by dollars, to catch a low point in the baht, may miss the absolute low point by a day or two. But, that couple day's journey might also realize an even lower point -- as speculation can be tricky. Anyway, as you say, to each his own. Right now, my wife is briefed on how to go online and transfer my Thai account assets to her account, when I croak. Not sure she could do that with a USD account..... (please, let's not reopen the discussion about a bird in the hand vs probate).

He's just confused, and has it in reverse. Early in this goat rope, a phrase came out from the Thais saying something like," If your home country has a DTA with Thailand, and if you pay taxes to your home country on your income, then Thailand will not bother taxing this income." We haven't heard anything about this subsequently -- probably because somebody realized that if Thailand followed this rule, they'd be forfeiting a lot of taxes they have first dibs on, per DTA. Another fumble by this guy is where he says, "All pensions paid or issued by the US federal govt are exempt from Thai taxes." Not quite. Only if that pension is for services rendered to the federal govt. My wife gets a pension from the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation -- a federal organization established to take over bankrupt pension funds. But that was for services rendered to PanAm. Thus, this doesn't qualify under the DTA. But, hey, maybe I"ll advise the wife to hire this guy when I croak, and thus pay no taxes to the US on her IRA required minimum distribution -- and pay no taxes to Thailand on her PanAm pension.....

Yeah, read here, if you've got nothing better to do: https://aseannow.com/topic/1008555-tax-specialist-in-chiang-mai/page/3/ He's a snake oil salesman. An IRS-blessed Enrolled Agent, most of whom are very competent and honest. However, he's found a gimmick around the "savings clause," found in all US tax treaties, that gives the US at least secondary taxation rights in all but a few situations (alimony, child support). But he claims Thailand is exempt from the savings clause, when it comes to IRAs. Thus, if you're a Thai tax resident, US taxpayer, and you cash out part (or all) of your conventional IRA every year -- don't pay the US, and remit to Thailand in a later year (old rules), and don't pay Thailand. Hey, what could be better? Move to Thailand for 181 days, and never again have to pay anyone tax on your IRA distributions. Sound too good to be true? You bet. [How he sells his con with the new remittance rules will be interesting -- just don't remit, I guess -- but still don't declare on your US tax return.] If you read the link, digest what's in the Swiss example, which identically describes treaty situations re IRAs with other countries, including Thailand. The Swiss example was elevated to the top floor of the IRS -- thus the sensical ruling. But apparently similar, auditable situations with this EA charlatan in Thailand, have never gotten by a confused GS11, completely perplexed by treaty language (imagine). Anyway, this case study had been, back when it appeared on this forum in 2017, a topic of interest with the retired group of CPAs I belong to. That, apparently, nobody using his services has ever be adversely audited -- sadly says a lot about the current IRS manpower and brainpower situation at the IRS. But, maybe moving forward, IRA tax avoiders will now, at least, have to pay Thailand -- if the IRS doesn't have the skills to detect fraud.

Of course.

You think too much. The Royal Decree allows LTR visa holders to treat otherwise "assessable income" as being the same as "not-assessable income" for taxation liability purposes.

Well, ok -- I guess Israel is then forced to continue turning Gaza into a parking lot. Sorry, Hamas -- that's what you get when you're stupid enough to start a fight with the world's premiere fighting force.

Of course not -- it's not income in any form or fashion. As far as listing it on a Thai tax return -- Thailand doesn't even want income that is non assessable to be listed -- let alone non income like a loan.

Easy. Just show TRD all the money I wired to Thailand is non assessable: Air Force pension; Social Security; inheritiance from Aunt Martha; pre-2024 money from a savings account; loan from Chase Bank, to buy a condo; gift from daddy; whatever. TRD doesn't have the resources to interview even those farangs with large wires to Thailand. They might do random tax compliance audits from this pool of fat cat farangs. But even here they'll probably find little assessable income -- or if they do, that this assessable income doesn't rise to the level of taxable income. The tricky part might be -- if I've co-mingled funds -- my rationale for figuring out what part of this chunk of fungible dollars is non assessable income. If TRD finally puts out guidance on this -- well, their rules may not be to our benefit. But if no guidance, and you're free to pick and choose as you wish -- well, any discussion with TRD might be very spirited. Nevertheless, without any guidance, it's hard to imagine TRD saying, "your rationale sucks, therefore you're a tax evader." But why worry about this, when the chance of being called in by TRD for a chat is zilch.

I doubt you can pay Thai tax in advance -- just file as early as possible when filing opens up at the beginning of the year -- and that may give you sufficient time before filing Norwegian tax forms. But, how you go about getting the Norwegian exemption is not readily apparent from Google, at least in English. The below reference does have contact information with the Norwegian tax authorities, which sounds promising: https://www.skatteetaten.no/en/person/taxes/get-the-taxes-right/employment-benefits-and-pensions/pension-and-disability-benefit/resident-abroad/countries/thailand/#:~:text=Under the tax treaty between Norway and Thailand article 18,exempt the pension from tax. Good luck.

A good example is income from rental property. Most DTAs -- as most follow the OECD and UN Model tax treaty language -- give primary taxation authority to the country where the property is located, i.e., the situs country. BUT, since the treaty language says "may be taxed by the situs country" -- but doesn't say "may ONLY be taxed by the situs country" -- then the treaty gives the non situs country secondary taxation rights. [an ONLY in the clause gives exclusionary taxation rights.] So, I'm a tax resident of Thailand, a US citizen, with rental income from a property in the US. My rental income is taxed by the US -- and as the situs country, thus the country with primary taxation authority -- they get to keep the entire kit and caboodle of taxation collected on that rental income. They do have to provide a tax credit for this US tax to Thailand -- since Thailand has secondary taxation authority per treaty. So, knowing Thailand has secondary taxation rights on my rental income -- if remitted -- I take out the back of an envelope, add my rental income to whatever assessable remitted income I already have. And if suddenly I now owe Thai taxes -- or I owe more taxes -- based on the rental income -- I then net my US taxes on this rental income against the Thai taxes owed on the same income -- as the US taxes are a credit. If I get a negative number, I just forget declaring this rental income, since Thailand, as secondary taxation authority, eats dirt due to the tax credit they have to absorb. However, if it turns out, after the US tax credit, Thailand does get some tax revenue -- well, I have to adjust the amount of rental income I declare on the Thai tax return to result in the added Thai tax figure from this rental income. But no need to have tax credit lines on the Thai tax return -- just do this offline, as described above, and plug in the derived numbers that result in the correct tax owed. Obviously, keep your offline figuring in a safe place -- in case you need to explain your logic some day to the TRD, Except for govt pensions -- and the rental example, above -- most DTAs have the country of residence as having either exclusionary, or primary, taxation authority -- meaning, they get to keep it all, and have to issue a tax credit to the secondary taxation authority country to absorb. The US, however, because of their Savings Clause -- always has at least secondary taxation rights -- even when the treaty gives exclusionary, or primary, taxation rights to country of residence. This in no away violates double taxation language in the treaties. Conversely, it just means US treaties prevent "no no taxtion" situations, i.e., you're gonna pay at least Uncle Sam.